什么是最好的选择 Intel Core i5-13420H 或 Intel Core i7-12700KF? 哪种处理器更快?
Compare the available specifications of these models.
Intel Core i5-13420H has a base frequency of 2.10 GHz (4.60 GHz). 8 / 12 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 45 W. 发布于 Q1/2023.
Intel Core i7-12700KF has a base frequency of 3.60 GHz. 12 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 125 W. 发布于 Q4/2021.
需要考虑的原因 Lower stated TDP / base power
Power limits alone do not measure performance per watt.
共同立场 Intel Core i5-13420H 在流行的基准测试中的CPU,用于与其他型号进行比较.
需要考虑的原因 更多的核心数量
4 more cores
Intel Core i5-13420H
有关被比较的处理器、系列、代数和细分市场的背景信息。
Core counts, threads, cache and clock modes describe the CPU configuration. Performance depends on the workload and comparable measured results.
内部图形不影响CPU的性能,在没有显卡或在移动设备上执行显卡的工作。
用于编码和解码内容的内置编解码器。大大地加快了所需的操作。
支持的RAM的类型、通道数量 Intel Core i7-12700KF 和 Intel Core i5-13420H. 根据主板的不同,可能支持更高或更低的内存频率。
比较TDP的要求 Intel Core i5-13420H 和 Intel Core i7-12700KF Power specifications describe different manufacturer limits. TDP, base power and maximum turbo power are separate values; they do not establish measured system consumption.
架构、接口、所支持的额外指令 Intel Core i5-13420H 和 Intel Core i7-12700KF, 虚拟机技术和工艺技术。
Shared tests with results for both models: 9
Each row uses one Blender version, operating system and compute backend.
| Test and settings | Intel Core i5-13420H | Intel Core i7-12700KF | Result difference¹ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender 5.2.0 / CPU / Windows | 122.093007 samples/min Submissions: 9 | 299.652343 samples/min Submissions: 10 | +145.4 % |
| Blender 5.1.1 / CPU / Windows | 126.965428 samples/min Submissions: 12 | 261.198774 samples/min Submissions: 10 | +105.7 % |
| Blender 5.1.0 / CPU / Windows | 104.606878 samples/min Submissions: 7 | 283.116113 samples/min Submissions: 6 | +170.6 % |
| Blender 4.5.0 / CPU / Windows | 121.032013 samples/min Submissions: 50 | 289.770122 samples/min Submissions: 95 | +139.4 % |
| Blender 4.4.0 / CPU / Windows | 114.602065 samples/min Submissions: 23 | 274.137726 samples/min Submissions: 32 | +139.2 % |
| Blender 4.3.0 / CPU / Windows | 121.517197 samples/min Submissions: 60 | 276.449649 samples/min Submissions: 55 | +127.5 % |
| Blender 4.2.0 / CPU / Windows | 120.950319 samples/min Submissions: 38 | 273.398609 samples/min Submissions: 43 | +126.0 % |
| Blender 4.1.0 / CPU / Windows | 131.293774 samples/min Submissions: 17 | 289.715603 samples/min Submissions: 24 | +120.7 % |
| Blender 4.0.0 / CPU / Windows | 113.618187 samples/min Submissions: 29 | 278.887706 samples/min Submissions: 43 | +145.5 % |
¹ Difference of the second result relative to the first in that row. No percentage is calculated for different upscaling algorithms. This compares published results, not a universal performance index.
These results have no shared test of both models with the same version and settings. They are shown separately without a percentage difference.
Results were obtained on the reported systems. Test versions and settings remain separate; incomplete conditions do not support calculated model performance differences.
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-13420H | 2975.039419 H/s | RandomX / XMRig 6.26.0 / 1M / 9 threads / windows System RAM: 16 GB OS: Windows NT 10.0 Motherboard: LENOVO / LNVNB161216 Duration: 336.13 s User-submitted run; tuning and power settings are incomplete. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-12700KF | 7153.689873 H/s | RandomX / XMRig 6.24.0 / 1M / 12 threads / windows System RAM: 64 GB OS: Windows NT 10.0 Motherboard: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. / B760 GAMING X DDR4 Duration: 139.788 s User-submitted run; tuning and power settings are incomplete. |